Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33963001›Full record

ArticleClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2021

Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma with Lymph Node Metastasis: Treatment-Related Outcomes and the Role of Tumor Genomics in Patient Selection.

Joshua S Jolissaint, Kevin C Soares, Kenneth P Seier, Ritika Kundra, Mithat Gönen, Paul J Shin, Thomas Boerner, Carlie Sigel, Ramyasree Madupuri, Efsevia Vakiani and 10 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Joshua S JolissaintDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-5595-6523
Kevin C SoaresDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Kenneth P SeierDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0003-3845-5249
Ritika KundraMarie-Josée and Henry R. Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-6723-2859
Mithat GönenDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-8683-8477
Paul J ShinDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Thomas BoernerDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Carlie SigelDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-6276-3968
Ramyasree MadupuriMarie-Josée and Henry R. Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Efsevia VakianiDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Andrea CercekDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
James J HardingDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-7029-4310
Nancy E KemenyDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Louise C ConnellDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Vinod P BalachandranDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-2956-223X
Michael I D'AngelicaDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Jeffrey A DrebinDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
T Peter KinghamDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Alice C WeiDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-2505-959X
William R JarnaginDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. jarnagiw@mskcc.org.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Disparities in COVID Disease Severity and Outcomes in New York CityUL1TR002384 · NCATS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI JULIANNE L IMPERATO-MCGINLEY · 2017 to 2026
$86.2M
Improving Outcome in Patients with Advanced Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Randomized Phase II Study of Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin With or Without Regional Floxuridine (FUDR)U01CA238444 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI CERCEK, ANDREA, IACOBUZIO-DONAHUE, CHRISTINE A · 2020 to 2024
$3.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002384NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS U01 CA238444
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLymph node metastasis (LNM) drastically reduces survival after resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC). Optimal treatment is ill defined, and it is unclear whether tumor mutational profiling can support treatment decisions. EXPERIMENTAL

designPatients with liver-limited IHC with or without LNM treated with resection (

resultsFor node-negative patients, resection was associated with the longest median overall survival [OS, 59.9 months; 95% confidence interval (CI), 47.2-74.31], followed by HAIC (24.9 months; 95% CI, 20.3-29.6), and SYS (13.7 months; 95% CI, 8.9-15.9;

conclusionsThere was no difference in OS for patients with node-positive IHC treated by resection versus HAIC, and both treatments had better survival than SYS alone. The presence of high-risk genetic alterations provides valuable prognostic information that may help guide treatment.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBile Duct NeoplasmsCholangiocarcinomaFemaleGenomeHumansLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedPatient SelectionRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33963001
PMCPMC8282702
OpenAlexW3157429786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.